men as Holker, Pope, Russell, Herschell and others, who had for years been working up to the position they held. At Liverpool, his knowledge of the trade between that port and New York was of great service to him. The juries thoroughly appreciated his practical mode of dealing with the circumstances of a case, and more than once, when counsel for a defendant, he fell foul of his adversary by suggesting as probable, and therefore to be accepted as proved facts, that which he did not call witnesses to support, and so taking from the counsel for the plaintiff the benefit of a reply. When challenged as to this he would say, " My learned friend, says I have not proved this. Why should I, when all of you gentlemen of the jury knew perfectly well from experience in the trade that it must have been so?" At Liverpool and Manchester, as in Lon don, Benjamin's clients were mostly mer chants, bankers, and ship-owners, but this was not always the case, and when he held briefs in causes which were not of special commercial interest, although not eloquent as a speaker, he always showed a great ex perience in the conduct of a nisi prins issue, and thoroughly knew the rules of the game; clear in the statement of facts, an effective cross-examiner, and cautious in the ex treme of expressing any false or figurative surroundings, he presented his client's case with great force to a jury. On one occasion he was counsel for a plaintiff who owned a cargo of cotton, and claimed damages against a Liverpool ware houseman, who had accepted it to be ware housed at a stipulated rent. The warehouse, it was said, was old, and the walls and roof gave way, whereby the cotton was dam aged. The contract, the stowing of the cotton and the fall of the warehouse, and consequent damage to the plaintiff, were matters of easy proof. To the defendant the claim was a serious one, as other car goes had been stored in the same ware
house, and, as similar claims were made by their owners, he naturally spared no expense in procuring a full array of that class of wit nesses who are usually called " experts," and upon whose evidence, rightly or wrongly, so many caustic remarks have been made by judges and others. One after another they came into the box with the full confi dence of vast experience, and the usual munition of tabular statements and long arrays of figures and calculations — archi tects, builders, engineers, warehousemen, and all who could assist in demonstrating to the jury that no stronger or more perfect warehouse had ever been constructed. All these Benjamin treated with becom ing gravity, asking of each some little ques tion, the answer to which might discount the evidence which they gave in a form so damaging to his client. At the end of these came the climax; and last, but not least, to add one crushing blow to the hopes of the plaintiff, came a gentleman from a distance, whose great prestige and com bined experience as both architect and en gineer eclipsed that of all who preceded him. He gave his evidence in that calm and measured tone which demands acqui escence from all who hear it, and explained the impossibility of the accident having occurred in consequence of any improper construction or want of repair of the ware house. While this was going on Benjamin sat taking a note in solemn gravity, then rose to cross-examine. Q. I think, sir, you said you had had great experience in the building of ware houses? A. Yes. Q. And that you have carefully con sidered the causes which lead to their weak ness? A. Certainly. Q. And you have applied those con siderations to the present case? A. I have done so.
